Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Had my heart set on CXP33/Ultegras 32/36 from Colo Cyclist. Placed order in April and was informed of backorder. No end to shortage in site. Time to move on I think.

I am about #255 and primarily a club rider on a Tarmac Pro. What do you guys think about DT RR1.1/Ultegra in 32/32? Roughly same price from Bicycle Wheel Warehouse that i was going to drop at CC.



http://www.bicyclewheelwarehouse.com/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=100


I guess I could go with Velocity Fusion or Deep Vs but will end up spending more for handbuilts. I am currently using Ultegra OPs in 32/32 that seem to be holding up pretty well but when I posed the original question on this forum, the OPs didn't get much support. The guys at Colo Cyclist also did not favor OPs.

thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
Try the DT RR 1.2's. Superb rims, stronger than the CXP33 and better made than a Velocity Deep V. Colorado Cyclist doesn't carry them but you can get them from many custom wheelbuilders (and Excelsports has them). It's a fairly new rim for DT but gaining a great reputation.
 

·
Carbon Fiber = Explode!
Joined
·
3,955 Posts
I don't even know why you're getting new wheels if your OPs are holding up fine.

I mean what's the reasoning for the new hoops? Do you really need a V cut?
 

·
Non non normal
Joined
·
10,183 Posts
I don't know why but you can't seem to get 36h ultegra hubs anywhere. That is probably the cause of the delay. I have two wheelsets of the same setup from Colorado Cyclist and they have been bulletproof. I keep waiting for the 36h ultegra hubs to start getting produced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,286 Posts
255 eh?... if you only have access to DT, then i would combine a 32 1.1 rim up front with a 32 or 36 1.2 in the rear.... i would be a little iffy personally specing a low profile rim like the 1.1 for that kinda use in the rear... also the double eyelet version might be a good bet, but at 478g, better off going with the 1.2 which is gunna be VERY strong and stiff and dependable, plus a bit more aero... overall it would add only 100-150g to the build, so you'll be back to being roughly square compared to cxp33s front and rear...

apart from that, yep, fusions are the closest match to the cxp...

[edit: oh! good job assh0le, i must be the reason for confusing the OP ! soz mate... when i referred to a 32/36 beefier rear, i meant to say that for velocity products combining the fusion or aerohead with the deep V in the back which does have a 36 drilling... meant to say that, but with the velocity bashing going on, i was like... meh, don't wanna open that can-o-worms... and made reference, errrantly, to the dts as direct replacements.... my bad...] if going w/ the dt 1.2s front and rear and you want lower spokes in the front... the stoutness of the rim is such that you'll have no issue going 28/32 w/ dt competitions all round....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
OK guys thanks, all good info for me. I like the suggestion of the 1.2s. They really look great. But of course, Excel Sports does not have the RR1.2 avail in rear wheels currently :mad2: Looks like DT is taking aim at the CXP and Deep V crowds.

As someone suggested I could just keep rolling with the OPs, they have been fine. I have 3 bikes and two wheelsets so the wife is not thrilled that one side of the garage has my work stand with a frame hanging from it constantly! $229 gets a pair of 32H OPs that are handbuilt at BWW.

It is really unfortunate that CC only offers a very limited choice of rims on thier builds as they are about $100 less than everyone else for handbuilds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,286 Posts
Soonerinfrisco said:
It is really unfortunate that CC only offers a very limited choice of rims on thier builds as they are about $100 less than everyone else for handbuilds.
Those two things are prolly related... carrying a huge stock of niche stuff carries with it a large overhead...

excel works for me?

Shimano Ultegra Hub Front HB-6600 32 Hole 201g $59.95 $53.96
DT Rim RR 11 Road Black 32 Hole 416g $69.95 $62.96
14/15 double butted spokes, 3 cross lacing 230g $24.00 $21.60
Brass nipples 30g $0.00 $0.00
Labor $20.00 $18.00
Total for the Front Wheel 877g $173.90 $156.51

Rear Wheel
Description Weight Price Discount
Shimano Ultegra Hub Rear FH-6600 10sp 32 Hole 415g $95.00 $85.50
DT Rim RR 12 Road Black 32 Hole 0g [edit: 585g] $69.95 $62.96
Drive Side 14/15 double butted spokes, 115g $12.00 $10.80
Non-Drive Side 14/15 double butted spokes, 3 cross lacing 115g $12.00 $10.80
Brass nipples 30g $0.00 $0.00
Labor $20.00 $18.00
Total for the Rear Wheel 675g $208.95 $188.06

Total 1,552g [edit: 2137g] -- $344.57

next page shows everything in stock!? or where u thinking a 36 rear... b/c believe me, the 1.2 will be FINE w/ 32h.... its a much bigger/stiffer/stronger rim than the OP or 1.1....
thats 430g vs 585g ....

that and the 1.2 doesn't come in a 36h....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I have a set of the 1.1's and weigh just a little less than you.. They have been great wheels.. The same weight class as open pros but seem to ride a little stiffer.. Not quite as stiff as a deep v but very solid overall wheel.. I have 32f / 36r built on american classic hubs, which are a large flange hub which helps with building a stiffer wheel..

At your weight, have them built with straight gauge spokes and you will be fine..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,105 Posts
This is crazy... Mavic is out of OP rims too... guess they don't want people building with their rims anymore.

You wanted butted spokes... not quite as stiff but longer lasting.

I'd also suggest Fusions, Deep Vs, or DT 1.2s... the later two being the stiffest and most aero.
 

·
Big is relative
Joined
·
11,901 Posts
I have a new rear wheel with an open sport rim. I haven't ridden it yet, but after I dented the CPX33 rim, the LBS couldn't find a 36 hole rim other than open sports. It looks alot like a MA40. I have a set of Joe Young wheels with deep V's with 36 supercomp spokes. Nice wheels. I am using them on a century tomorrow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
With the DT 1.2's you certainly don't need 36 hole. We have a number of track sprinters riding them very successfully on the track with 28 hole rears and they have no problem with them (that's 1800+ watts and 205-235 lbs).

Also, I'd second the views that you should consider other sources for wheels. The big mail order shops do of course build wheels, but you'll get much more personal service and lifetime support from most of the better wheelbuilders. Check www.ergottwheels.com in particular -- Eric is a frequent poster here and can supply you with a number of viable alternatives including any of the items suggested in this thread.
 

·
Shirtcocker
Joined
·
60,886 Posts
Soonerinfrisco said:
It is really unfortunate that CC only offers a very limited choice of rims on thier builds as they are about $100 less than everyone else for handbuilds.
Not saying CC is bad (I have no experience with their wheels) but a good builder is often worth paying extra for. You can have the best wheel components, but if the builder sucks they will never be good wheels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,105 Posts
11.4 said:
With the DT 1.2's you certainly don't need 36 hole. We have a number of track sprinters riding them very successfully on the track with 28 hole rears and they have no problem with them (that's 1800+ watts and 205-235 lbs).
Just a note, that track sprinting at 1800W doesn't put as much torque on the wheel as standing on a steep hill... the torque is inversely proportional to gear ratio. Also, sprinters aren't likely to encounter potholes and such... it's just a different scene altogether.

On the other hand I agree that 36 spokes will not be necessary with a Deep V or 1.2.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
rruff said:
Just a note, that track sprinting at 1800W doesn't put as much torque on the wheel as standing on a steep hill... the torque is inversely proportional to gear ratio. Also, sprinters aren't likely to encounter potholes and such... it's just a different scene altogether.

On the other hand I agree that 36 spokes will not be necessary with a Deep V or 1.2.
Don't know what kind of sprinting you do, but national team level sprinting is a lot tougher than standing on a steep hill -- most road riders peak at about 900 watts or so, often less for hill climbers, while 1800 watts is only middle of the road for elite level sprinters (the Aussie sprinters like to max out their track SRMs at 2500 watts just to deprive their coaches of usable data for analysis). The lateral forces from accelerating and turning on the banking put extra stresses on a wheel that road typically doesn't match. I agree there aren't potholes, but we were talking about whether a wheel would be viable in normal use. If you hit a clincher on a pothole, the first damage will be to the bead area which isn't supported by the spokes anyway. Whether you have 24 or 36 spokes, you'll bend the lip of the rim.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,105 Posts
11.4 said:
Don't know what kind of sprinting you do, but national team level sprinting is a lot tougher than standing on a steep hill
I'm speaking of torque applied to the rear... which is a function of force applied (not power) and gear ratio. In other words, if force is the same and the gear is 1/3rd as big, then the torque is 3 times as much. Low cadence, low gear, and high force are the worst torque conditions on a rear wheel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
rruff said:
I'm speaking of torque applied to the rear... which is a function of force applied (not power) and gear ratio. In other words, if force is the same and the gear is 1/3rd as big, then the torque is 3 times as much. Low cadence, low gear, and high force are the worst torque conditions on a rear wheel.
But the force isn't the same, and you aren't considering cadence either. A big gear turned three times as fast is still a greater application of torque to the rear wheel. Think about it: Climbing wheels can be built light, while sprint wheels have to be built very sturdily.
 

·
Polka Power
Joined
·
1,348 Posts
11.4 said:
But the force isn't the same, and you aren't considering cadence either. A big gear turned three times as fast is still a greater application of torque to the rear wheel. Think about it: Climbing wheels can be built light, while sprint wheels have to be built very sturdily.
Depends...yes and no. Torque as in how much turning force goes into the wheel for forward motion is increased by lower gears. I would assume that a relatively out of shape person could put more torque into the wheel with a MTB 22x34 than the strongest sprinter could with a 50x15 or bigger. Lower gearing simply is a longer lever = more force. Remember torque is NOT power. http://www.iprocessmart.com/techsmart/formulas.htm#hp (just remember that 746w is 1hp) So even though they are going really slow and putting out less power, the torque can be much higher.

Can the track sprinter put more side to side stress on the wheel thrashing the sprint? Probably.
 

·
Travels by Map
Joined
·
3,060 Posts
Bocephus Jones II said:
Not saying CC is bad (I have no experience with their wheels) but a good builder is often worth paying extra for. You can have the best wheel components, but if the builder sucks they will never be good wheels.
I have 32h CXP33 w/Ultegra hubs that I got from CC and they've been perfect. I had heard a lot of good things about their wheels and they came trued and have stayed that way for the past year or two with no adjustments on my part.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top